Almost everyone in business that uses email has issues with their Inbox.
Complaints vary, but essentially, it appears that we all become the victim of communications that we would rather not have: loosely described as spam.
If you’d asked accountants in the 1960’s if they were suffering from spam their reaction to your question would largely depend on their preference for a certain pre-cooked meat product in their sandwiches. According to Wikipedia, Spam is a brand of canned precooked meat products made by Hormel Foods Corporation. It was first introduced in 1937 and gained popularity worldwide after its use during World War II. By 2003, Spam was sold in 41 countries on six continents and trademarked in over 100 countries. In 2007, the seven billionth can of Spam was sold.
And then along came email and Botnets, and spam took on a whole other meaning…
Email spam has grown steadily since the early 1990s. Botnets, networks of virus-infected computers, are used to send about 80% of spam. Since the expense of the spam is borne mostly by the recipient, it is effectively postage due advertising.
Unfortunately, this means that 99% of email users are a victim of a communications system that is proving incredibly resilient to regulation. Spam block software is a growth industry, and based on an inexact science. As many users will confirm, overactive spam blockers will also prohibit email that you want to see.
The ideal solution, for those who receive 100’s of emails a day, is to make the most of junk mail filters and employ someone to manage the process for you. As this involves reading your mind (do I or do I not want to read this?) busy users may be stuck with DIY options.
Whilst there are now tastier alternatives to Spam in our sandwiches, email is here to stay and we need to make the most of it. Perhaps we should stop boasting that we have 600 emails in our inbox (poor me) and instead boast that we have very few unopened emails in our inbox. The solution may be in our attitude to the electronic stuff thrown in our direction, rather than the technological defences we place in its way?